chinchilla2020

helpdesk

It has been a gradual change.

> already maximally happened since decades ago

We just laid off ~4000 employees and are replacing them with hiring in India. Your notion that it already happened decades ago is wrong.

> That's a fact

Great evidence. Add "full stop." to really drive the point home

There is more to it than that.

1. Decide if optimization is even necessary.

2. Then optimize the slowest path

another commonly misinterpreted one is the `shouting fire in a crowded theatre` quote.

In it's original context it means the opposite of how people use it today.

If AI can do anything, why can't I just prompt "Here is sudo access to my laptop, please do all my work for me, respond to emails, manage my household budget, and manage my meetings".

I've tried everything. I have four AI agents. They still have an accuracy rate of about 50%.

High karma in an internet community is not something I respect automatically. Pewdiepie and every other little online personality have tons of followers and likes.

tptacek has always come across arrogant, juvenile, opinionated, and difficult to work with.

As I said in another post. The article is pure rhetoric. It provides no actual numbers, measurements, or examples.

It's just "AI did stuff really good for me" as the proof that AI works

and builder.ai just filed for bankruptcy after a billion dollar valuation. Timely.

Agreed.

The article provides zero measurement, zero examples, zero numbers.

It's pure conjecture with no data or experiment to back it up. Unfortunately conjecture rises to the top on hackernews. A well built study on LLM effectiveness would fall off the front page quickly.

The article provides no solid evidence that "AI is working" for the author.

At the end of the day this article is nothing but another piece of conjecture on hackernews.

Actually assessing the usefulness of AI would require measurements and controls. Nothing has been proven or disproven here

The reason I remain in the "skeptical" camp is because I am experiencing the same thing you are - I keep oscillating between being impressed, then disappointed.

Ultimately the thing that impresses me is that LLMs have replaced google search. The thing that disappoints me is that their code is often convincing but wrong.

Coming from a hard-engineering background, anything that is unreliable is categorized as bad. If you come from the move-fast-break-things world of tech, then your tolerance for mistakes is probably a lot higher.

They sort of exist and do have women in them - but there are tons of tons of men you can meet with.

Sports clubs are full of friends you can make. I'm close with alot of guys that I train with.

Try tennis, or lifting, or running, or golf. Do NOT go to DnD meetups and other low effort stuff. Exertion is what forms bonds.

> Large companies sometimes love to preach "intrapreneurial" spirit, encourage the individual will & ownership, all while refusing to acknowledge the constraints & impositions of corporate hierarchy, the lack of freedom, that the large organizational structure imposes.

Eloquently put. This is what drives me nuts about Brian Chesky. He wants employees to take ownership - but doesn't give them any ownership.

If I worked for BNB and was aggressively pursuing a new idea, I could still be laid off any second because of his ego. That isn't ownership.

I've read some literature on this decompiling and reverse engineering work. It always blows my mind that there is a community of experts in it, toiling in science. Yet the academic and learning communities do not know anything about it. It's like an underground CS topic.